Giftedness

What the term giftedness “really” means has been discussed for centuries. There are many domains in which one can be considered gifted, including sports, music, and intellectual pursuits. However, when discussing intellectual giftedness, general intelligence or cognitive ability likely plays a central role in any definition. Experts often differ on verbal definitions, and beyond general ability, there are specific domains of cognitive ability such as verbal, math, and spatial. With full acknowledgment that definitions of giftedness vary widely, this entry focuses on a quantitative definition of intellectual giftedness as a variable on a continuum, focusing on what is measurable—specifically discussing general cognitive ability (often indexed by IQ) and its connection to a variety of outcomes.

When intellectually gifted students are identified when young and followed up later in life, research shows they attain doctorates, publications, patents, higher income, and even university tenure at rates well above the general population. Examining countries as the unit of analysis, research has also demonstrated that the intellectually gifted in each country disproportionately impact innovation and even gross domestic product of that country. Many times, when individuals who have achieved high standing in their professions are retrospectively assessed to see whether they were intellectually gifted when they were young, they turn out in fact to have been highly intellectually gifted. Combining these sources of data shows that intellectual giftedness is important in the development of expertise and even impacts broader societal creativity and innovation.

The idea that beyond a certain cut point—for example, an IQ of 120—that more ability no longer appears to make a measurable difference has also been shown to be false. Even within a group with an IQ of 137 and higher and within highly select groups of millionaires, billionaires, and Fortune 500 CEOs, more ability predicts higher rates of earning doctorates, publications, patents, tenure in higher education, income, network power, and net worth. More ability continues to have a payoff even at the highest levels. This does not, however, rule out the importance of many other [Page 735]factors, including hard work, education, interests, personality, and luck. It does show, however, that the intellectually gifted tend to be largely overrepresented among the people who lead and create modern society.

Intellectually gifted students, as a whole, not only turn out to be very high achieving but also are no different from the general population in terms of psychological well-being or adjustment. Research on very young gifted children and on adults who were identified as gifted when they were children shows that in terms of family, friendships, romantic relationships, and broad indicators of well-being, adjustment, and satisfaction, these individuals fare quite well. Of course, this does not mean that intellectually gifted people don’t face challenges. Many do, and without appropriate academic challenge and acknowledgement of the psychological issues they might face, this can potentially do harm.

However, at least within the United States, little funding is directed toward supporting the development of gifted children in K–12 public education, most likely because of the U.S. focus on equity rather than excellence. Because financially advantaged students can access talent development opportunities outside of school but financially disadvantaged students cannot, a deep divide has developed between resource-rich and resource-poor students, impacting the representation of talented but disadvantaged students in elite levels of society. This has consequences for diversity and inequality.

...